You are correct, there is absolutely no difference between twerking and saying 6 million wasn’t enough, these are completely equivalent acts.

This reply is offensive to me and therefore you should be fired from your job.

The severity is quite different, but the premise is not. These are both offensive things to different people.

These are words you typed comparing twerking to support of the holocaust .

I would say it highly depends on how it reflects on the institution. Twerking has nothing to do with any possible education she might have received. Saying that black people are unintelligent but good dancers shows the attempts to educate the student has failed them, which makes the school look bad if they get the scholarship.

Similarly, I’m fine with people who got fired for participating in January 6th. Any company that kept them on could face a major boycott and those people don’t deserve their jobs because they’re insurrectionists.

But this particular girl? Totally deserves the scholarship. Twerking is not a reflection of how she was educated.

A government funded state school has no right to push their Christian beliefs onto its students, which they clearly did, as quoted in the article.

Luckily, they also have no backbone, as they immediately reinstated everything as soon as this hit the news.

We understand that. What you don’t understand is that we’re allowed to criticize what they value.

@JasSmith @FlyingSquid it was a public school. And they cited religious beliefs as for why they were so offended. That’s a clear violation of church and state and while it’s certainly not new or unique it’s not defensible or right.

What if they did something racist outside of a work setting?

Wdym you want people to have principled opinions on cancel culture? We’re on the internet, here we ~~doxx~~ hold people accountable for the things we don’t like and complain when the wrong people face repercussions of their behavior outside their jobs

In my day we did all our racism anonymously or down the pub, rather than online, under your real name, next to a photo of your real face.

I’m going to make an ai video of you calling me a n***** and send it to your bosses.

See how this works? How do we even know it was her twerking?

https://www.wionews.com/technology/spain-minor-girls-fall-victim-to-deepfake-porn-ai-generated-nudes-shock-the-nation-638019

No, why?
Freedom of speech does not mean freedom of consequences…

The paradox of tolerance suggests we draw a line and decide some things are unacceptable to tolerate or the tolerant will be overwhelmed by the intolerant. I’m sure Poppers arguments are not without flaws but absolute free speech is a pipe dream.

There are limits to free speech in US laws already, some common examples are slander, libel, and threats. There’s also “imminent lawless action” where words inciting violence can be restricted.

Maybe I’m drawing a false correlation between the two ideas but in general I don’t think it’s so black and white as you might suggest.

The paradox of tolerance is some philosopher’s idea, not some sort of axiom. We really need to stop quoting it. It’s not even the only idea of its kind. There are several philosophers with more nuanced takes.

The philosopher was correct. We should keep quoting it.

Says who? It’s okay to agree or disagree with the dude, but citing him as if it’s a source or evidence of something is just plain wrong. And that’s how the paradox of tolerance is usually brought up.

I did state that his argument was not without its flaws. It still serves its purpose as a thought experiment about how a society should handle radically dissenting opinions.

I won’t pretend to know the answer in practice and censorship makes me uneasy but my debate is against free speech absolutionists.

Amoral isn’t a virtue worth upholding. We should encourage good things and discourage bad things.

I think having the freedom to express stupid opinions is actually a good thing

Good news, you have that freedom. But everybody else has the freedom to decide not to associate with you for it.

I don’t think public institutions should be able to make that call. Private institutions and individuals, sure.

Welcome

We’re not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!

The Rules

Posts must be:

Links to news stories from…
…credible sources, with…
…their original headlines, that…
…would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”

Comments must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.

And that’s basically it!

US High School Student Loses Scholarship Over Social Media Twerking Video(www.ndtv.com)

Not The Onion

!nottheonion@lemmy.world

Welcome

The Rules

Community stats

Community moderators